Wisconsin native, conservative critic of everything.
"Once abolish the God, and the government becomes the God." ---G K Chesterton
"The only objective of Liberty is Life" --G K Chesterton
"Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions" --G K Chesterton
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling

Thursday, April 02, 2009

Kolpack: The Final Word

Why was Ms. Ruth Kolpack fired?Ms. Kolpack was let go because the Bishop is not confident she can or will present the complete and authentic teaching of the Church, the presentation of which he is responsible for in every parish in the diocese. ...Before the bishop made his decision, Ms. Kolpack had the opportunity to meet with him and assure him that she would faithfully carry out her role as a catechist of the Roman Catholic faith. Ms. Kolpack claimed that, in good conscience, she was unable to comply. ...the role of the catechist is to constantly endeavor to transmit (i.e. "echo") the teaching of the Church by internalizing it through contemplation and prayer, exemplifying it in their behavior and associations, and enthusiastically teaching it in its fullness and splendor. Since those who present themselves to the Church have a right to this authentic teaching, it is the obligation of all catechists (bishops, priests, deacons, religious and lay people) to provide it

Not her thesis (silly as that was); not her membership in Call to Action (questionable as THAT organization is); just her refusal to comply with the Bishop's request to 'faithfully carry out her role as a catechist.'

Probably, anon, if she hold in contempt all they believe and teach. But - unlike you - I see them as faithful Catholics adhering to the tenets of the Catholic faith, much in the way a doctor would adhere to the Hippocratic Oath when performing his work.

If the doctor decides medicine is all wrong, why should or would he stay employed as a doctor?

Likewise, why should someone who holds the Church's unchanging teachings in contempt be allowed to undermine those teachings? If Ms. Kolpac doesn't like them, she's free to leave and find work elsewhere.

It is one of the responsibilities of the Ordinary to ensure proper catechesis in his diocese. Ultimately all Catholic teachers – priests, deacons and lay people – serve at the pleasure and in place of the Father of the Diocese – the bishop. Unfortunately, for too long bishops have abdicated that paternal responsibility. So when a bishop rightly calls someone to account, it is seen as an ‘imposition’ or an egregious exercise of authority. It is not.

Years ago in Ireland, each diocese had a “Diocesan Catechist” – a priest charged with ensuring that proper doctrine was being taught in the schools. In the course of the year the Diocesan Catechist visited every school in the diocese at least once. There was ‘fear and trembling’ in a school prior to those visits, lest any deficiency be found in the curriculum or ‘heresy’ in the students (he ‘examined’ the students as well as the teachers…).

Given the complexities of today’s world and the shortage of priests – not to mention the possibility of not finding an orthodox priest in some dioceses – that might not be workable today. But there should be more oversight in every diocese of what children are being taught about their Faith and the materials being used. Documents and directives can only achieve so much, but the specter of a personal visit might achieve much more.